About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
, foreign policy tends to either stain or illuminate a president's legacy. time will tell which foreign policy position will define the obama years. joining us to discuss from washington is former assistant secretary of state and professor at george washington university, professor pj crowley. professor, thank you for joining us. >> hello. >> pj as we talk about the legacy of the obama doctrine, vis-a-vis our war on terrorists drones. the attacks were motivated to do what they did by the wars in iraq and afghanistan. i'll quote a little bit from that story. the 19-year-old suspect in the boston marathon bombings has told interrogators that the american wars in iraq and afghanistan, motivated he and his brother to carry out the attack. what do you make of that, pj? >> i'm not surprised at all that has been a motivator for jihadists around the world, particularly the u.s. invasion of iraq in 2003. so this just continues a theme, and it's not even unique to the united states. faisal shazad, the times square bomber, said he was motivated by the ongoing drone campaign in pakistan. >> wes, as
as normal and sweet. >>brian: is there a chance they were normal men and did our foreign policy play into this? a foreign c.i.a. operative, head of the osama bin laden unit, what went into the mind set of these two that you can ascertain from what you know? >> i think we're going to find because of the internet age, because of the rapidity of communications, the grievances of the arab world against the united states in terms of our foreign policy, whether it's being on the arab peninsula, supporting the saudi tyranny, supporting the israelis is now a common thread across the muslim world. as long as that foreign policy stays in place, we need to realize that we're cultivating enemies. this is going to continue both at home and abroad for a very long time. >>john: we should expect more of these kinds of attacks? >> without a doubt, sir. this is no reason to believe our domestic population of young male muslims is going to be immune from the propaganda of al qaeda and other groups that has worked everywhere in the world. this is just a problem that america needs to face. we don't neces
something against the american government. they had a heated argument about u.s. foreign policy. nice to see you, sir. >> hey, nice to see you. >> tell me, how did you first meet the two brothers? was it just living in the same building in is that how you knew them? >> i met the older brother two weeks prior into moving into the apartment under them. i met him at a pizza is shop across from my high school. >> what was tamerlan like? >> my first interaction with him was he was sitting at a table at a pizza shop across my high school and he was talking to another kid that used to go to cambridge latin high school. i overheard the conversation and he was basically explaining the koran to the person he was sitting with and the differences between the bible and the koran. i noticed in a way he was idolizing the koran and trash talking the bible. i was very interested in the topic and i didn't know much about religion, whether it's christianity or islam, and he seemed like he was very well-educated about both so i wanted to join the argument or the discussion. so, yeah, i basically joined the disc
security and foreign policy issues as opposed to his very robust domestic agenda? jon: lindsey graham was on with his last hour and pretty critical about the job the department of homeland security -- which, after all, is an arm of the administration -- did in the tsarnaev case. want to play a clip. >> my problem with this administration is their policies are failing. they do not believe that we're at war. they ignored signs and warnings from libya. we haven't had one person detained as an enemy combatant for intelligence-gathering purposes since he's been president. jon: is this starting to resonate with voters, do you think? >> i don't know yet that we've seen that. but we could see it over time. i think it pretty much depends on how the public views the president's handling of these incidents, and do they think that the president is keeping them safe. as we saw under president bush, you can have a horrific attack on the home lambed, and if you respond -- homeland, and if you respond in a way the public feels you should respond, they like your response, they're going to feel good ab
overseas. in terms of our foreign policy. if we need to keep doing that and we have to keep doing it. we have to tell the american people how bloody and how long this war is going to be. this has nothing to do with gender equality or elections. it has to do with waging war against people believe to be interfering with their land and their faith. lou: thank you both for being with us. >> thank you, sir. lou: up next, the markets recover after yesterday's massive sell-off. we will show you why here next. ♪ @ ♪ lou: stocks recovered from the biggest 1-day sell-off of this year on encouraging news on housing. joining us now, a senior u.s. economist for deutsche bank securities. this is a pretty impressive performance today. is it convincing enough hat we are going to see more strength on the days ahead? >> it certainly has been impressive as a performance. i think a lot of the movement we saw today was just to recover from the massive sell-off yesterday when the news of the tragedy in boston struck. stocks went into a sharp nosedive. the news that it was a relatively limited event
plitations for civil liberties questions, potentially foreign policy questions. i want to listen for a second to president bush after 9/11 just as a reminder where we were as we talked about what happened in that moment. let's take a listen. >> on september 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country. our war on terror begins without data. but it does not end there. it will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. [ applause ] >> so this set out the parameters,ary that we have been working under for the past decade or more. >> yeah. that was the global war on terror. there was a big gap between that rhetoric we just heard and the legal authority that the president actually had, which under the 2001 authorization of force was to only pursue al qaeda, the taliban and groups directly found responsible for 9/11. we'll continue to have that legal friction both on civil liberties and foreign policy questions. the first instinct to combat is that people are rightfully outraged at these killers. part of what they want to do is
. there are people on the other side of the world that don't like our foreign policy, in the middle east who don't like our culture in any way. to them we're the enemy. doesn't it stun you, mr. mayor, people from a breakaway or rebellious former soviet union have come and killed anonymously people they don't even know but know them as fellow inhabitants of america, just as a slaughter? and we don't have a front with chechnya. we don't have a beef with them. or them with us. that just, to me, is like -- i almost feel like i don't know anything to say at this point sometimes. >> it was a total shocker to me. i went through about ten different scenarios yesterday who it could be, from, you know, islamic radicals to right-wing crazies, to just isolated people who were just nuts. i never would have thought of chechnya. the fact is, if anything, we're seen as somewhat sympathetic with the chechnyans and overcritical of the russians. maybe we're right or wrong. that's the way it's seen. i was in russia a day after the attacks in beslan, you know, that really were a tremendous shock to the russian peopl
and we could concentrate solely on traditional foreign policy threats like iran and syria and the instability of the korean peninsula. of course those threats remain large but this shows we are still a country in terrorist cross hairs both from abroad and from within. >> it sounds like you think this will reshape our focus as well. >> i think it will, no question about that. but at the same time we've got to make sure that we don't single out one particular community for attack and os t tracism. >> it's very common for them to sfwring we don't care at all to we exaggerate the threat. this is a common pendulum swing. it's also a mistake. and what we've also seen, just in the last week, is most of the coverage and most of the discussion by elites on both side of the aisle has been far more measured than what you just read by representative king. >> but it was measured because we were still a country in crisis. now that it seems that the crisis, perhaps, has subsided, now the nuts will come out. >> that's true, and this is where the media plays an even bigger role. in the mon
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)